full-disclosure - Comparison of Network Security Scanners

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20040701204608.GD37427@netpublishing.com>
From: ggilliss at netpublishing.com (Gregory A. Gilliss)
Subject: Comparison of Network Security Scanners

On my *first* day at my current employer (a large network appliance
vendor), we had a situation similar to this. One of these "independent
evaluators" informed my employer that they were evaluating my employer's
product, and that my employer had 24 hours to respond to their evaluation
before they submitted their results. 

Basically these people were contracted by one of my employer's competitors
to "evaluate" the competing products and publish the results. My employer's
investigation revealed that these people obtained their equipment (with
back level software) through a "gray market" vendor, and that their "tests"
included such things as not configuring the hardware prior to testing.

In summary, these "independent evaluators" appear to be nothing more than
paid agent provocateurs who publish "results" designed to promote one
specific product over the competition. 

BTW, I am not implying that *all* such testing organs are of this caliber,
however caveat emptor.

G

On or about 2004.07.01 21:35:12 +0000, Anders B Jansson (hdw@...listi.se) said:

> And to everyones surprise their own product came out on top!
> 
> Wow, it has to be good, film at 11
> 
> // anders
> 
> Alexander wrote:
> >Hi all!
> >
> >Comparison of Network Security Scanners:
> >
> >http://www.maxpatrol.com/pd_cmp2.asp
> >
> >In this survey the following products were tested:
> >1	IS - Internet Scanner 7.0	Internet Security Systems
> >http://www.iss.net
> >2	LG - LanGuard 3.2	GFI
> >http://www.gfi.com
> >3	Ns - Nessus 2.0.6	Renaud Deraison<
> >http://www.nessus.org
> >4	NR - NetRecon 3.6	Symantec
> >http://www.symantec.com
> >5	Rt - Retina 4.9.97	eEye Digital Security
> >http://www.eeye.com
> >6	MP - MaxPatrol 7.0	Positive Technologies
> >http://www.maxpatrol.com
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> >Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

-- 
Gregory A. Gilliss, CISSP                              E-mail: greg@...liss.com
Computer Security                             WWW: http://www.gilliss.com/greg/
PGP Key fingerprint 2F 0B 70 AE 5F 8E 71 7A 2D 86 52 BA B7 83 D9 B4 14 0E 8C A3